Samancor Chrome Limited v Bila Civil Contractors (Pty) Limited and Others (75327/2019) [2019] ZAGPPHC 1025 (10 December 2019)

Samancor Chrome Limited v Bila Civil Contractors (Pty) Limited and Others (75327/2019) [2019] ZAGPPHC 1025 (10 December 2019)

The court found that the applicant, as co-owner and adjacent landowner, was entitled to notification of the environmental authorisation application but was deprived of this right due to the first respondent's failure to comply with statutory requirements. The applicant only became aware of the authorisation upon its mention in court papers and lodged its appeal within 20 days of such awareness. The court held that the appeal was valid and, in terms of section 43(7) of NEMA, suspended the environmental authorisation and prospecting operations. The requirements for an interim interdict were satisfied: the applicant established a prima facie right, irreparable harm to the environment was...

Citation
[2019] ZAGPPHC 1025
Parties
Applicant: Samancor Chrome Limited; Respondent: Bila Civil Contractors Proprietary Limited; Respondent: The Minister of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries; Respondent: The Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy; Respondent: The Regional Manager: North West Province
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 December 2019
Case Number
75327/2019
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Interim Interdict Application and Counter Application
Outcome
Interim interdict granted; counter-application dismissed; costs awarded to applicant.
Judges
N Janse Van Nieuwenhuizen
Legal Topics
Environmental Authorisation, Interim Interdict, Public Participation, Appeal Procedure, Separation of Powers, Mining Rights
Environmental Law Land and Property Civil Procedure Environmental Authorisation Interim Interdict Public Participation Appeal Procedure Separation of Powers +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samancor Chrome Limited

Applicant

Bila Civil Contractors Proprietary Limited

Respondent

The Minister of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries

Respondent

The Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy

Respondent

The Regional Manager: North West Province

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Interim Interdict Application and Counter Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to an interim interdict restraining the first respondent from prospecting pending the outcome of an internal appeal under NEMA.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's appeal under section 43 of NEMA is valid and suspends the environmental authorisation.
  3. 3 Whether the first respondent's counter-application to declare the appeal void should be granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant, as co-owner and adjacent landowner, was entitled to notification of the environmental authorisation application but was deprived of this right due to the first respondent's failure to comply with statutory requirements. The applicant only became aware of the authorisation upon its mention in court papers and lodged its appeal within 20 days of such awareness. The court held that the appeal was valid and, in terms of section 43(7) of NEMA, suspended the environmental authorisation and prospecting operations. The requirements for an interim interdict were satisfied: the applicant established a prima facie right, irreparable harm to the environment was...

Court Disposition

Interim interdict granted; counter-application dismissed; costs awarded to applicant.

Orders

  • The first respondent, its employees and contractors are interdicted and restrained from conducting, facilitating or being involved in any activities (including prospecting operations) on the areas subject to its Prospecting Right and Environmental Authorisation, specifically on the Remaining Extent of Portion 2 of...
  • The first respondent is ordered to pay the costs of the application.